Blog
The Contextual Argument
Author: Amos Yong
Date: 30.08.2010
Category: Poverty & Wealth, Prosperity Gospel
Translations
Closely related to the missional argument is what I call the contextual argument. If the missional argument says both that prosperity is given for the purposes of world mission and evangelization, and that to some degree prosperous missionaries and evangelists are needed to bring the gospel to the affluent, then the contextual argument says that the theme of prosperity is particularly important in light of popular understandings of what it means to be saved prevalent among the masses who inhabit the global South. Put alternatively, whereas the missional argument presents the perspective of those who are engaged in missionary or evangelistic work, the contextual argument emphasizes the viewpoint of those who are missionized and evangelized. There are at least two levels of prosperity underneath this claim.
First, people are being drawn to Christian faith across the global South because they or someone they know have experienced healing in some significant way. Consultation with local medicine-men or women or even Western doctors – or in some cases, not having access to the latter – did not alleviate their physical or psychosomatic condition, but an encounter with Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit did. The gospel, or good news, in this case, refers to physical healing, blessing, and, by extension, prosperity.
Second, the center of gravity of Christianity is shifting from the West to Latin America, Africa, and Asia in part because people have experienced God as savior not only in their bodies but also in the concrete circumstances of their lives. God is providing them with jobs, enabling payment of bills, rescuing them from debilitating debt, promoting them in the workplace, the church, or the public domain, bringing about a higher quality and standard of life – in short, hearing their prayers and transforming their situation. Thus are the masses finding God’s salvation addressing the particularities of their physical, material, and economic needs. Christian redemption thus is not abstract for specific, resulting in the overall prosperity and well-being of those who walk in the way of Christ and his Spirit.
Prosperity in this scheme of things might be understood as being the most recent form of the contextualization of Christian faith in the non-Western world. If previous generations of missionaries sought to Christianize their environments, more recent missionary strategies have emphasize the indigenization or inculturation of the gospel instead. But what does it mean to indigenize or inculturate good news in contexts marked by poverty, disease, and under-development? In these situations, the gospel that makes a difference must heal bodies, enable socioeconomic lift, and bring about prosperity. Such prosperity surely might involve the achievement of affluence even when measured by Western standards, but it might also surely mean nothing more than that those would couldn’t pay their bills in the past now can do so, or that those who did not own their own homes in the past now do, etc.
The point that prosperity advocates in the global South insist on, thus, is this: why shouldn’t African, Asian, and Latin American Christians be recipients of the prosperity and blessings enjoyed by Western Christians? Why is it implausible that God should transform the poverty of his people into affluence across the Southern hemisphere as God has done so in the Western world? Of course, such "contextual," even "missiological," rationales could be no more than self-serving theological rationalizations. But the problem of globalization and transnationalism means that inevitably the lines are blurred in terms of self-understandings. Of course, non-Western Christians, even prospective believers, are going to gauge the power of the gospel according to its long term fruits in the lands of Christendom. If prosperity marks the quality of life in Christian nations, why shouldn’t it be expected that personal conversion to Christ might bring about collective, even national, wealth understood broadly?
The economic implications of the contextual argument include the capacity of the Christian gospel to mobilize the masses to make lifestyle changes, perhaps embrace a kind of Puritan work ethic, engage in entrepreneurial or other forms of economic activity, and perhaps assume responsibility for development projects. So if the missional argument spurs Westerners to “invest,” perhaps with the hopes of enjoying some kind of economic return in the future, the contextual argument motivates local partnerships with development efforts to work for the betterment of life, perhaps in the hopes of experiencing redemption in the form of socioeconomic prosperity and lift, if not in one’s lifetime, then perhaps by the generation of one’s children or grandchildren.
Keywords: contextualization, indigenization, acculturation, global south
Reach Map and Statistics
Views: 6621
Comments: 15
Recommendations: 0
One Click To Action
Connect me with people interested in this conversation:
Join related conversations
- DIaspora Groups in Europe
By ThomasHieber
- El legado de un Padre
By MisionGloCal1Scott
- La Gloria de Jesucristo en la Misión
By MisionGloCal1Scott
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | The Lausanne Global Conversation is powered by World Wide Open | What is World Wide Open?
Conversation Post Comment
United States
I guess my question is, “what do we consider ‘prosperity?’” If we are talking about the economy, my western way of thinking immediately makes me think of monetary wealth. However, I do not believe this to be “prosperity” in God’s eyes. He will provide all that we need (Matthew 6:24-34). It sounds like that those who experienced the miracles of God (those who were healed) were the ones who experienced true prosperity. They were made whole through Christ. However, I can see how being able to meet one’s needs financially is prosperity. Therefore, prosperity does include economic growth. How does this relate to your argument in “Is It Possible to Develop a ‘Balanced’ Argument for Prosperity?” In that article, I was under the impression that prosperity was measured by one’s ability to give to those who need. I can see how that would apply here. If we help poverty stricken persons grow economically, then they would be able to contribute to their communities and help them form a community of service and giving. Am I on the right track in my thinking or have I missed something? I really enjoy your articles, by the way!
27.11.2011
Kenya
Becoming Christian indeed can give economic lift. But, there are good and bad ways of achieving such lift. A bad way perhaps - Christians receive donor funds that non-Christians don’t get (from Western churches). A good way perhaps - the love of Christ binds what was once a divided community into a unified ’body’ of the holy Lord that can work together, in amongst other ways, economically.
I suggest the former can counter the latter. Donor funds generate corruption, idleness, dependency, misunderstandings and lies (at all costs please the donor ...).
One could add that – indeed, God could desire to bring ‘wealth’ to the Third World. He took wealth to Rome in the old days. But, the role of Christians was to castigate Rome for its sin and transform it into a holy people, and not to concentrate their efforts onto economic policy.
06.09.2010
United States
@ Jim_Harries:
yes, since I am not an economist, I don’t have any policies to recommend; what is important as a Christian, however, is to be mindful about the economic contexts of our life of discipleship & of the economic consequences or implications of our choices and lifestyles - these are more difficult said than done.
06.09.2010
Kenya
@ ayong:
I presume you mean easier said than done?
Perhaps I could argue that I am an economist ( http://www.jim-mission.org.uk/articles/african-economics.pdf )? Of course in a sense we are all economists – as we all interact in economies on the basis of certain understandings. That understanding is invariably built upon an appreciation of a limited part of the whole-truth.
I would certainly value for there to be a rise in economic level in places like Africa. Pardon my use of a simple example. I am currently in a multi-story building. Should I want to ‘go outside’, the window will take me there more quickly and easily than will the doors and the steps. But, the window route will result in my lying in a crippled heap on the floor. All that glitters is not gold, and short-cuts may be a route to disaster …
Indeed, I believe that the Gospel had a major part to play in the raising of living standards of the West. It did so by working on people’s hearts, when communicated to them in their language, in contexts that were ‘real’. Denying the Gospel such a place by replacing ‘real’ contexts with ‘contrived’ donor ones (always putting money in hand with the Gospel) may unfortunately deny the poor their opportunity for economic ‘lift’ (Harries, Jim, ’’The Name of God in Africa’ and related contemporary theological, development and linguistic concerns.’ Exchange, Journal of Missiological and Ecumenical Research. 38/3 (2009) 271-291, 289) (http://www.jim-mission.org.uk/articles/the-name-of-god-in-africa.pdf).
06.09.2010
United States
@ Jim_Harries:
Sorry, yes, easier said than done; thanks for sharing the links to your work. I will read them with interest and perhaps have some other comments in response. The issue about donations is complex. Yes, I don’t think that we should try to "sell" the gospel nor behold recipients to "us" based on our "generosity" while holding them captive to their "needs." So the question would be how to channel donations in an ethically responsible & economically viable manner while retaining the integrity of the gospel & its effects (including at the latter have implications for donors).
06.09.2010
United States
@ ayong:
Jim, I have had a chance to read two of your articles you pointed me to; thanks for doing so - you’ve opened up a whole other domain of issues related to donations that were off my radar, particularly how they perpetuate dependence. I was aware of the complexities relating western economic processes & its interface with the witchcraft & magical worldview of SSAs, but your work has sensitized me to the very practical challenges that western donations pose for the African economic mentality.
Who did you do your work with at Birmingham?
10.09.2010
Kenya
@ ayong:
My supervisor in Birmingham was Allan Anderson. Glad you found the read challenging!
10.09.2010
United States
@ Jim_Harries:
Dear Amos and Jim,
With great interest I have followed your discussion. I have also read Amos’ article, "Joseph Wore Designer Robes, Too!" and Jim’s "The Name of God in Africa." I would like to introduce a theological historical concept that could contribute in the cross-cultural communication, i.e., deification or theosis.
When we speak about the prosperity Gospel, we often think about the practice of "Name it, claim it." Often we forget that there is a biblical base for God’s promises fulfilled in the daily practice of walking out the Gospel. For example, II Peter 1:3-4 "His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature and escape the corruption in the world caused by evil desires." Many who proclaim the prosperity Gospel, from Pentecostal or Charismatic point of view, include also that the believer, in this form of spiritual formation of deification, is involved in the process of discipleship called sanctification.
As much deification finds its roots in the Eastern Orthodox theology, this should not be a reason to shy away from this for a number of reasons: 1) For more than 1000 years this was part of the theology of the early church, 2) western theology, as most in the western hemisphere embrace, has been strongly influenced by the Enlightenment philosophy. Only recently we see change to this. 3) Even throughout western church history, we will find pockets of believers who have embraced the mystical ideas of deification--becoming a mature son or daughter of God.
Jim, as you stated, "Mutual understanding is only possible in mutual context (p.4)," and "Belief or faith increases in magic when the impossible becomes possible (p.9)." Within the conclusion, point 5, you speak about "’filling the subject gap,’ translating between African and historical Christian works." I would like to propose that when this vacuum could be developed with a contextualised theology of deification in Africa, would this help in the understanding that God the Father communicates on a personal level in such a way that the believer learns to walk with responsibility and integrity in his inherited position as an "Ambassador for Christ (2Cor6:20)" --nobless oblige?
Amos, you stated that the switch from the western, to the southern hemishere is contributed to the "experience of healing in significant ways," as well as that "God is experienced as savior in concrete circumstances." Again, here I like to propose also that deification would embrace participation in the divine interaction with humankind. As a result Joseph’s Designer’s Robes would become a natural result of cause and effect, and hereby preventing that the prosperity Gospel would come with a western taste and flavor?
Apologies for my wordiness. I am looking forward to your responses.
18.10.2010
Kenya
@ uslim:
Afraid I am too unfamiliar with deification or theosis.
18.10.2010
United States
@ uslim:
Yes, if we can develop a unique Orthodox argument for "prosperity," that would further the discussion indeed. I’d be interested to see if the doctrine of theosis is the key - not sure...
18.10.2010
Kenya
@ ayong:
One problem with ’prosperity’ theology in Africa, is when it is ’cargo cult’.
What I mean by that, is that African Christians can attempt to achieve prosperity that is ’Western’ on non-Western lines. e.g. a school examination is a ’Western’ invention designed to encourage a student to study hard, but an African church leader may see the key to passing an exam to be in deterring untoward spirits through aggressive prayer. Or a failing car engine can be treated with holy water, etc.
18.10.2010
United States
@ Jim_Harries:
Jim,
In May 2010, I graduated with an MA in Divinity, theology and church history tract. Even for a MA degree, you can only take a twenty some classes on which you touch a few subjects. I am well aware that there are many other things out that I have not studied and will challenge me. Your article about the different names of God in the African context reveals an insight of which many other Christians are unaware. It compares to the 5 1/2 years I ministered among the Navajo people in Arizona. The Navajo God(s) consists of one supreme being, Yei-bi-chei (messangers), and mythological hero personalities. Historically, Christian missionaries have rejected everything in exchange for a western Christianity and a western God.
I have not studied the Eastern Orthodoxy as a subject in depth. All that I received is through the study of early Christianity and references to a theological dictionary. I do have The Orthodox Study Bible: New Testament and the Psalms (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1993). The definition for deification is explained here as, "The grace of God through which believers grow to become like Him and enjoy intimate communion with the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit (see article, ’deification’ at 2 Pet.1:2; 2 Cor.3:18; 2 Pet.1:2-4;)". In the footnote 2 Pet.1:2 "Gnostics infiltrated the church and claimed that they had access to special knowledge. Peter teaches that true knowledge of God is found within the Church." Footnote at 2 Pet.1:3-4 states, "Being renewed by God’s power, we become partakers of the divine nature. This does not mean we become divine by nature. If we participated in God’s essence or nature, the distinction between God and man would be abolished. what this does mean is that we participate in God’s divine energy, described by a number of terms in Scripture, such as glory, life, love, virtue, and power. We are to become like God by His grace,and truly His adopted children, but we never become God by nature. According to some Church Fathers, this transformation especially occurs through the Eucharist, for when Christ’s body and blood become one with ours, we become Christ-bearers and partakers of the divine nature." (emphasis original). Footnote 2 Cor.3:18 "Created as the image of God, we see His uncreated image, the Son, the glory of the Lord in two ways: (1) through the Son’s deified humanity (see 1 Cor. 132:12; James 1:23-25) and (2) in thepower of the Spirit. As we behold Him, we become what we were created to be. God is infinite; therefore, growing in His image and glory has no limits. We shall ever see God more clearly and ever be transformed into His likeness." This far Orthodox comments on Scripture.
Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, 1 Th Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600) (Chicago, Il: University of Chicago Press, 1971), dedicates several pages [344-349] to Dionysian influence on the western orthodox theology.Without going in too much detail only one quote, "The point at which the dogmas of orthodoxy and the tenets of mysticism intersected most significantly was the definition of salvation as deification or, in Dionysian schema, ’creation,deification, restoration’" (344). Much of European mysticism find its roots with Dionysian, Pseudo-, the Areopagite.
I would like to propose to take a fresh view on the history of mysticism within the praxis of missiology. In an unpublished, research paper that I submitted for a class, I compared the Navajo Yei with the theological,biblical angels or demons. In retrospect, this paper is a bridge of love, honor, and respect towards the other with their God revelation. I was not successful uploading this paper, but will send it on request.
Downloadable Attachments
19.10.2010
United States
@ ayong:
I am aware, as the Dutch would say that "I am moving on slippery ice," and not know where I will end up. The development of an unique Orthodox argument for prosperity I would like to see within the relationship between the Lat. deification, (or Gk theosis), and the Lat. circumsessio, (or Gk perichoresis) prosperity would find contents not so much in economic wellbeing, as far more in spirtual formation and spiritual growth.
As stated to Jim, deification finds its early development within the orthodox tradition. The same thing is true with circumsessio, which I prefer to call by its Gk name perichoresis for reflecting its use by Jurgen Moltmann and Leonardo Boff of the mutual relationship of the Trinitarian God within the personal relationships. Leonardo Boff invites humanity within creation to become the fourth person in this mutual relationship. Others have followed pursuit, they stand not alone in this (smile).
For the mystical part, the union with God, I would reflect on 14th century Meister Eckhart. Bernard McGinn and Sara Miller conclude in an article ("What can we learn from the mystics? Lost in God," Christian Century (March 22, 2003):22-28), to the question if mystical union is a form of self-deification? McGinn responds, "God deifies himself in us when we become perfectly detached, and that’s the nature of God’s creation of humanity as the image and likeness of God--imago Dei. I think Eckhart would say no, we don’t deify ourselves, but if we totally negate ourselves, then God deifies himself in us." At the end, Meister Eckhart was rejected being in part a heretic within the Church of his time. But time and time again, the concept of "union with God" reappears.
The development of an argument for prosperity within a Pentecostal/charismatic perspective, relating to the development in the southern hemishere, I propose, could be formed in a threefold cord woven by a contextual union-with-God, deification, and perichoresis.
19.10.2010
United States
I appreciate your perspective and insight. Christian mission movements create social/economic lift. - in second or third generation. But their level of commitment/ spiritual vitality decreases as they become respectable and attain certain social/economic status. This is usual pattern in "Christian History". -Classic case : Methodist movement (John Wesley warned about this).
We do need wisdom and balance on this issue. Both sides have good points.
05.09.2010
United States
@ mission21:
There is no doubt that socioeconomic lift changes the nature of our spiritual life; yes, in some cases, the result is decreased spiritual vitality, but in others, more intense invigoration. Thre are always seductions, regardless of where we are at on the socioeconomic spectrum. But your referencing Wesley’s admonition is a good one & can’t think of any context in which his maxim to "earn all you can, save all you can, & give all you can" is inapplicable.
06.09.2010
You must be logged in to post a comment. If you don’t have an account, you can sign up now (it’s free and easy!).